NQLT vs PCLG

NQLT vs PCLG

Which is better, NQLT or PCLG?

NQLT costs less.

NQLT has a lower expense ratio. NQLT is less concentrated, with 51.6% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 62.6%.

Lower Fees: NQLTLess Concentrated: NQLT

MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.

Side-by-Side Comparison

MetricNQLTPCLG
Expense Ratio0.48%Best0.49%
AUM$50M$92M
Dividend Yield0.00%0.04%
Holdings6327
YTD Return+2.29%Best-5.60%
1Y Return--8.10%
Top 10 Weight51.6%Best62.6%
Fund FamilyNeuberger BermanPolen Capital
CategoryEquityEquity
StyleLarge Cap GrowthLarge Cap Growth
InceptionJul 10, 2026Sep 30, 2025

Not shown on this pair: 3Y Return (annualized), 5Y Return (annualized), Volatility (annualized), Max Drawdown, $10,000 over the window.

NQLT vs PCLG growth

Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view is available from the range buttons; it is not the opening view here because over the whole period one of these two funds moves so much further than the other that its line would sit flat on the axis.

Compare NQLT against instead:NQLT vs SPYNQLT vs QQQNQLT vs VOONQLT vs VTIPCLG against:PCLG vs VXUS

NQLT vs PCLG Performance

Neuberger Quality Select ETF (NQLT) is an ETF from Neuberger Berman and Polen Focus Growth ETF (PCLG) is an ETF from Polen Capital. Year to date, NQLT is up 2.29% versus a loss of 5.60% for PCLG.

Past performance does not guarantee future results.

Fees and Cost Over Time

NQLT charges 0.48% per year while PCLG charges 0.49%. On a $10,000 position that is $48 vs $49 annually, a gap of $1 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, NQLT currently yields 0.00% against 0.04% for PCLG.

Holdings Overlap

NQLT already in PCLG36.5%
PCLG already in NQLT42.8%

36.5% of NQLT's money is in holdings PCLG also owns. 42.8% of PCLG's money is in holdings NQLT also owns.

The two portfolios partly overlap.

8 positions in common, counted across the 63 positions we hold weights for in NQLT and 29 in PCLG, against full books of 63 and 27.

What only one of them owns

Our book lists 18 positions for PCLG that do not appear in our book for NQLT (51.2% of the fund), and 53 for NQLT that do not appear in PCLG (60.9%).

Some of those will be the same company recorded under a different code in one of the two books, so the real difference in what you would own is no larger than this and may be smaller. We do not name the individual positions here for that reason.

Top Shared Holdings

StockWeight in NQLTWeight in PCLGDifference
MSFTMicrosoft Corp7.64%9.35%1.71%
NVDANvidia Corp6.09%7.82%1.73%
AMZNAmazon.Com Inc7.67%5.98%1.69%
GOOGAlphabet Inc. C5.40%6.16%0.76%
MAMastercard Inc2.63%5.54%2.91%
LLYEli Lilly & Co.3.14%4.80%1.66%
ASL:ASAsml Holding Nv Unsponsored Adr Ordinary Shares3.02%1.18%1.84%
2330:TWTaiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co Ltd0.88%1.96%1.08%

42.8% of PCLG is already inside NQLT.

You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.

NQLTPCLG

Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, NQLT or PCLG?

NQLT has an expense ratio of 0.48% while PCLG charges 0.49%. NQLT is the cheaper option, by $1 a year on a $10,000 investment.

What is the holdings overlap between NQLT and PCLG?

42.8% of PCLG's money is in holdings NQLT also owns. 42.8% of PCLG's is in holdings NQLT also owns. They hold 8 positions in common, counted across the 63 positions we hold weights for in NQLT and 29 in PCLG.

Which pays a higher dividend, NQLT or PCLG?

NQLT yields 0.00% while PCLG yields 0.04%, so PCLG currently pays the higher dividend yield.

Is PCLG better than NQLT?

NQLT has a lower expense ratio. NQLT is less concentrated, with 51.6% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 62.6%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.